Rhodesia

[FEBA]

If ever there were a worthy cause for armed intervention then Rhodesia/Zimbabwe is it. The expulsion of white farmers (Rhodesian nationals) from their farms and homes will have ghastly consequences for the country as a whole with famine a certainty.
President Blair's obsequiousness towards the intellectually challanged George Dubbya will involve HM forces in military action in the desert where the motive for such action is questionable as no evidence of duplicity has been offered from Washington, whereas evidence of rigged elections, brutality, state sponsered murder was in such quantity that Mr Mugabe banned the BBC from the country.
Aside from the political tyranny within, millions of innocent children's grisly fortune is being written by a marxist despot. Time to drop the troops before we have to drop the food aid.

[solotk]

Feba,
It's called Zimbabwe, and has been since 1980. The persistence in certain quarters, in calling it by a colonial name, associated with historical exploitation and Apartheid, is food and drink for the left wing press, and does the cause of those that remain, no good at all.

However, I posted this on the other means last week

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/africa/2201197.stm

Dear Mr. Blair,

How long are we going to wait, before we are committed, in concert with other African Commonwealth forces, to do something about this man?

The arrests of Farmers, their families and workers continues, and we still stand idly by.

On the 12th of September, you promised to fight terrorism, anywhere on the globe it occured.

Terrorism is happening, on a daily basis, in a former British colony, and still, we do nothing. Are we really that much America's poodle, or are we a Sovereign nation in our own right?

We intervened in Sierra Leone, and restored order, with the grateful thanks of the people there, what makes Zimbabwe so different?

How long must we wait? Until the President starts "disappearing" farmers, their families and workers?

The next stage for Mugabe, will be to declare these people, "Enemies of the State" at which point, British subjects and their dependants, black and white , will be in mortal fear of their lives.

You seem to believe, that Iraq will benefit from a regime change. Would the same not be true for Zimbabwe?

Come on Mr. Blair, when are we going?

[BlueWolf]

Did you know, if you say "Mugabe" backwards, you get "E, ba gum"?

I know what you are saying solo and I commend you for so doing, but FEBA has a valid point;
These people who are my people were Rhodesians long before they were forced to become Zimbabweans, which they are now about to be denied the right to be.

I can't hope to save even a fraction of the world that needs saving, but if I have to prioritise, then I will begin with those who are my people.

In that particular part of the world I still identify them as Rhodesians. Whatever their colour may be. If they were still Rhodesians, they probably wouldn't need saving. Nor would those who have long called themselves Zimbabweans.

[FEBA]

Chaps,
So far I have been ticked off and picked up on politically correct issues. Not quite what I was after. Should we jump out of the back of a Herc' over FLLS or not.
Rgds
FEBA
(Forward Edge of the Battle Area)

[newswatcher]

How old is Mike Hoare? Still alive? Chance to redeem Seychelles '81.

[AirfixPilot]

I don't think the name of the country has much bearing here, although it's history might.

From what I've read in the press, it's completely unacceptable what's going on over there, and as said before, we'd have a much better reason for military intervention there than in the desert. Personally, I'm fed up of Britain being dragged along by the Americans on their highly selective war on terrorism. If it doesn't cause them any immediate problems then it doesn't exist, huh? I'm getting bored of being the latest American state...

[Arkroyal]

The reason that Bliar will stand by and watch this thug is that he is 'countering the forces of conservatism' in best New Labour fashion.

And whether you PC hand wringers can take it or not, it's because the wronged happen to be white, and the oppressor Black:mad:

[solotk]

Feba,
You didn't seem to read beyond the "PC correct" part of my post, you didn't even read that properly it seems.

There is only one answer, everyone of us knows it. The issue, is far bigger than 5,000 white farmers. It's about their families and dependents, and the workers.

http://www.gta.gov.zw/Land%20Issues/LAND.htm

Mugabe is trying to acquire Mig-29's. He is trying to acquire MBT's and generally upgun his forces. At long last , old Mbeke is thinking "Cripes"

Look at the big picture here. Farms is a sideline, a smoke screen if you will and, the White Farmers, are like Hitlers Jews.The best way, to turn peoples anger from the ruling class, is to pick on a minority, and blame them, for ALL your countries ills,especially, if you can throw, slavery , oppression and apartheid into the volatile mix.

http://www.genocidewatch.org/alerts/zimbabwe110102.htm

Black Bob got a taste for adventurism, and it's rewards, with his forays into the Congo, and sooner or later, he will turn his gaze outside Zimbabwe's borders.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/1773356.stm

He will marshall the poor, oppressed, starving and generally fcuked about, with his Marxist rallying cry of "Africa for the Africans, everyone else is a puppet state, Liberate your brothers"

If ever, there was someone who needed a regime change, it's Mugabe. I think most of us are agreed, or at least think, that Iraq is based on Oil and revenge, not a coherent policy of anti-terrorism.

I believe, Bluppet really did rally to the cause on 9/12 , because he believed, that there was a chance, to do something about terrorism. I also believe, he absolutely never saw the Iraq issue coming, but, like the gambler who doubles his stakes chasing a losing streak, he's too far in to say "Fcuk off Dubya, this is about cash for you and the rest of your corrupt campaign funding corporate twats"

But we can do something about it. As much as I detest the old trout, and as much as I personally believe, her motives were political and self-serving,and as much as I will never forgive her, for my best friends death down there, we went and liberated a hunk of rock. Ostensibly, because UKPLC does not take crap. But all the other reasons are well known.

If Mugabe is not stopped now, then "Rascism against white farmers" is a mere bagatelle, compared to what the average African is capable of, when the words, food, tribal and diamonds get mentioned.

....and I know, I was in Rwanda in 1994.

If we don't stop him now, you will see a war in Africa, on a scale you've never seen before, it will make Angola look like a minor fracas.

Then what, shall we empty our wallets, and wring our hands? Shall we committ ill-equipped forces enmasse, with an invasion from South Africa, Malawi and Zambia?

Or shall we lift the Air Mobile brigades and the Armour now, and make our proposals from a position of strength?

Someone mentioned Mike Hoare. The man's a buffoon. However, it does touch on an important point. How many combat experienced veterans, Black and White, in South Africa and Zimbabwe are there, willing to help overthrow Mugabe?

Original poster...MabhunuNumba1

http://pub6.ezboard.com/bsavezimbabwe

Zanu PF Thesaurus
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Democracy: We will beat/kill you until you agree with us.

Rule of Law: We will steal from you, or imprison you if you dare to compete with us, or refuse to give us backhanders.

Economy: Something which has no meaning in a Sovereign African State. It is an imperialists method of suppressing Zanu supporters.

Agriculture: Pamberi ne 3rd Chimurenga, land to Zanu chiefs; everyone else p1ss off.

Police: Willing agents of State sponsored terror.

Army: Better armed Mahobo thugs than the police.

CIO: A gathering of inept and corrupt individuals whose role is to further Zanu PF whilst enriching themselves.

Reserve Bank: Print money and give it to comrade bob.

Inflation: Just look at how much you get paid now!!

Whites: Racist /imperialist / zionist / colonialist / vestigial oppressors.

The West: Neo Colonialists.

Farm: An attention deflecting device which should be stolen, destroyed, desertified until the people love us again.

Vote: A lighthearted murder fest, where the peoples will is irrelevant unless it coicides with ours.

Corruption: Its all lies, now leave me alone I'm on the phone to Switzerland.

[SASless]

In the mid 70's I was offered a position in the Rhodesian Air Force...decided not to accept...regretted that decision ever since. Any short term contracts out there that might tend to shorten Black Bob's tenure? Count me in....this time!

I sure hope the US and UK governments are proud of what they allowed to happen.....where is the willpower to intervene in what is a just and proper cause? You can bet your socks that the UN will want us to feed the starving masses that are caused by this evil man's bid to stay in power. This time I hope we turn our backs on them and tell them why. They have made their bed....let them lie in it.j The Security Council should be passing resolutions that will result in Mugabe being sent to the place all deposed dictators wind up in.

[FEBA]

SASLess,
I hope that the hacks and journos might pick up on this thread. Indeed there have been numerous perusers but only a small number of contributers. Time is running out for the white farmers, but more importantly the black masses whose bread baskets are depleting fast. The cause in Zimbabwe (see I'm learning SoloTK) is compelling for all right minded people, civilian and military and one which would receive the blessing of a nation should our government be brave enough to order military action. Dubbya's unsubstantiated quarrel with Iraq does not warrant our support. Surely we have more pressing engagements. Does everybody share my opinions?

[SPIT]

How long will it be before MUGABE IS ASKING FOR FOOD for his poor country???,
And BLAIR will be one of the FIRST to say "YES".:confused: :confused:

[Smoketoomuch]

Labour will do nothing, they simply don't care - there seems to be a 'whites deserve it' attitude at large.

[Copied from another board]...
Our esteemed government is attempting to prevent entry here to Zimbabweans who were forced by Mugabe to renounce their UK citizenship, and forcing others to pay black market rates [10x normal] for UK passport renewal. This comes barely a month after NuLab awarded full British citizenship to 35,000 east African Asians - Labour say that these people need "an insurance policy in case their circumstances change in the future."
Staggering hypocrisy.. even by New Labour's standards.


http://www.thisislondon.co.uk:80/dynamic/news/story.html?in_review_id=668224&in_review_text_id=639898
The Government is being accused of placing unnecessary obstacles in the way of white Zimbabwean farmers trying to flee to Britain from the Mugabe regime.
Shadow foreign secretary Michael Ancram said former British nationals who had been forced to renounce their citizenship by President Robert Mugabe were now having difficulty resuming it.
He also said the British High Commission in Harare had started using the black market exchange rate when it came to calculating the fees for UK passport renewals or extensions - raising the costs more than tenfold. [...more]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/2088560.stm
Tens of thousands of east African Asians left without the right to live in any country are to be allowed to take up full British citizenship after 30 years of waiting.
Home Office Minister Beverley Hughes says the government to right what he calls the "historical wrong" inflicted by the Labour government in 1968.
The passports of about 35,000 British overseas citizens, many of whom had worked for colonial administrations, were made effectively worthless by new immigration rules.
Ms Hughes has announced an amendment to the Immigration, Nationality and Asylum Bill to give those people the right to live in the UK.
Ms Hughes added: "They are likely to see it as an insurance policy in case their circumstances change in the future."
[...more]

[Jimlad]

call me cynical but if Mugabe were white and trying to commit genocide against black people we would be half way to Africa by now.

The times reported that six million people face starvation, that is the six million people in electoral districts who voted against him at the election. He is starving the opposition to death. That is genocide. Better not tell President Bluppet - if he finds out he might try the same against those of us who oppose him.

The sooner we go in and look after our own, rather than letting innocent men women and children die the better. Blair is shaming the reputation of this once proud country with what he's doing - ie nothing.

I bet every person in the forces would volunteer to go sort out Mr Mugabe - I certainly would.

[solotk]

Make a poll Jim, if you build it, they will come.

Suggested format.... If ordered to go, which do you think is the right and proper action, as befits the traditions and ideals of British Forces

1.Iraq

2.Zimbabwe

Like we don't know the answer already :mad:

[A Civilian]

People seem to have forgetten that these are the same white farmers that declared themselves independent from the British Empire back in the day. They didn't like the idea of giving the black man the vote. What do we owe them? Nothing. They made there choice years ago and so their going to have to live with it.

Zimbabwe's president for life is no different than 95% of all African Presidents. He takes what he wants and shoots those who say no. Perhaps we should invade every single country in Africa that does this?

[Scud-U-Like]

For an alternative view, read this:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/zimbabwe/article/0,2763,774845,00.html

These things are rarely as clear cut as they seem.

[solotk]

No,

Just the ones whose policies, ensure that yet another burden is put on taxpayers, when a situation is preventable.

It's not just White Farmers, it's 6,000,000 people.

But of course, we'll just wait till it goes to rats, then we can put in food aid, and a toothless, bureaucracy-bound UNPROFOR, to make sure we spend billions more then we had to, and the people we were trying to replace, just become big wheels in another organisation.

I have no doubt, that some land distribution is needed in Zimbabwe. However, right now, that land, seems to go to Zanu PF supporters, and convicted UK criminals, as oopposed to being for the benefit of the indigenous population.

Sometimes you are left with no choice, but to instigate a regime change, for economic and humanitarian considerations.

Time this diverted to Jet Blast methinks........

[myrddin]

A Civilian,
I wonder if the crew of HMS Tiger would share your views. You have point, however that was then and this is now. I doubt whether Ian Smith would have predicted the calamity his country no finds itself in, neither would he have thought that the calamity would come from his fellow countrymen whose education had been paid for by the wealth of a nation run by whites.
May I suggest that if you want a political insight as to how the majority of the nation (GB) feels towards a foreign issue, then the Guardian should be your last port of call.
The real issue here is whether we allow millions of zimbabweans to die of starvation whilst we watch a high tech war in Iraq on TV, a war which doesn't have a lot to do with us, then drop the relief aid into Zimbabwe, or do we DO SOMETHING ABOUT ROBERT MUGABE AND HIS CORRUPT GOVERNMENT NOW.
I know what should be done, do you?

[A Civilian]

If you really want to give some "aid" to Zimbabwe then perhaps we (us as well as other european countries) should stop selling arms to both the governments and rebel's in African countries. There maybe rules against arms sales to Zimbabwe but there are no bans on selling arms to the Isle of Man. Nor on the Isle of Man selling them onto Zimbabwe if you catch my drift ;)

Does everyone remember BandAid in the early eighties. And all the other aid that was sent to Eithopia. Well the reason why they were all in such dire straights is not because of drought but because of some mutil-year war between different fractions. Most of this aid just went to feeding soldiers who simply prolonged this war. Maybe if a "proper" arm's ban occured half of these wars would end over night. And therefore the acompaning "droughts" and "crop failures" would cease too. But does anyone think that will ever happen?

And as for all this ongoing strife in Zimbabwe. I doubt the average British person really cares. He'll read it in a newspaper at the breakfast table saying "dear dear" before turning over the page to read the sports pages. I personally think we've become so used to seeing terrible images of starving Africans on TV over the past 20 years that we've become immune to them. They dont really effect me at all nowdays.

[BEagle]

How is it then, that Botswana is doing very well indeed yet a few miles over the border in Southern Rhodesia the place is going to rack and ruin?

Corruption, greed and institutional incompetence. It really is time the skids were put under Comrade Bob and his thieving henchmen once and for all......

[Scud-U-Like]

myrddin

Of course, the Guardian is not the best selling paper in the country. That distinction goes to the tabloid dross and tabloids in disguise, like The Times and the Telegraph. If you bothered to read the Guardian, you might find it has a better insight into the political thoughts of British people than you imagine.

Tough economic sanctions (eg freezing the corrupt proceeds of Mugabe's presidency) and political pressure from other African leaders are the way ahead on this issue.

[Paterbrat]

Ahh come on guys give the chap a break. He led his country to freedom from the white opressors. He sorted out the Matabele problem in the South of the country after the war, they were getting far too stroppy and actualy believed that they had a right to have a say in the running of the country, besides let us not forget that they were invaders as well! The Fifth brigade, a fine body of crack troops, superbly trained by his glorious and esteemed North Korean allies, quickly restored order. The population down there remember them all right. They raped and killed and tortured.... but of course that is all fabrication, lies, they did no such thing, they were there just to... restore order.

Miriam Mengistu, an honored house guest (nice chap from Ethiopia, remember the famine over there) has given him the most marvellous scheme for sorting out the general public who recently had the termerity to start grumbling and daring to question his divine policies. They even made him cheat a little at the last election to stay in power. But Bob will remember their ingratitude, they will be punished and the white farmers will be removed, a little hunger will quickly bring the population to heel and remind them whose boss. The incoming aid aid will of course have to be administered by the Government/Bob. This will bring him both revenue and increased power because only those who he likes and acknowledge him as the supreme authority will be fed. He really doesn't give a monkeys left nut who live and who dies, black or white, the fact that the country will depend on aid doesn't bother him in the slightest. The weak will die, just like they have since time immemorial in the familiar scortched earth policy, the strong will survive and Bob is strong and supported by the military. It is a move that will accomplish so much, clear out the hated white farmers on the pretext of land distribution and tighten his grip on a weakened country.
The West, oh depend on it, they will send aid, they will have their band aids, their telethons, their government ministers like Clare Short who think they are 'sweeties' ( her comments on the UN aid efforts in the Congo) and will help regardless of how or why the country is in the state it is. He also has his friends like Col Ghadafi and the N Koreans who send their advisors in to see that he will be well protected. Sound a little cynical or just plain facts; just watch what happens, it's been going that way for quite some time now. But of course it was all just propoganda by white colonialists wasn't it??

[Jackonicko]

As long as we call them Rhodesians and call it Rhodesia, and as long as we emphasise the plight of the White farmers, the West's concern looks like no more than solidarity with the former oppressor, and can be passed off as being anti-democratic and anti-African, imperialist and colonialist.

The right issue to fight Mugabe on is his suppression of democracy and the MDC (his oppression of fellow blacks) and not the redistribution of land from those widely seen as colonialist thieves and former oppressors.

I don't think of the white farmers that way. White Rhodesians always seemed to me to be more 'decent' and less racist than many White South Africans, with a more enlightened and paternalistic attitude. The performance of those who have remained bears scrutiny - they tend to have done a great deal for Zimbabwe, yet remain obvious scapegoats.

[BEagle]

'Rhodesia'?. It's 'Southern Rhodesia', isn't it......?

[Cardinal Puff]

Rhodesians/Zimbabweans and South Africans, both black and white, died for the Commonwealth during both world wars. Unfortunately the new PC viewpoint seems to be it's OK as long as it's not a white doing the damage.

Food aid is only being distributed to those areas Mugabe sees as loyal to the cause and anyone else can just get stuffed. The old tribal thing rears it's ugly head again and the West just wrings it's hands and stands by idly while another Rwanda/Burundi type genocide is being perpetrated. Only difference is that this one is more subtle and drawn out.

Left to those posting on this thread (with an obvious exception) I've no doubt the situation would be cleared up in a few weeks but as some wise old bloke once said "Every country gets the government it deserves.". I guess it applies to us all.

[FEBA]

Lets have a vote on it.
Do we help Dubbya or sort out Mugabe instead

[BlueWolf]

Preconceptions are a strange animal, aren't they, Jacko. Of the countless hundreds of white southern African people who are or who have been of my acquaintance I think the most consistent thing I can say is that they continue to surprise me.

I know Boers who number amongst the most enlightened people on the planet, and Rhodies who are as ignorant and biggoted as the worst. There appears to be something of a predeliction amongst white western people to classify persons of a smaller nation as being somehow more civilised than their larger near neighbours - Canadians are obviously better people than Americans, and we New Zealanders are naturally better informed and less rednecked than our Australian cousins. What a wonderful place the world would be if the facts bore out the theory.

It's a great shame that race has entered this issue to cloud its truths, but at the same time, the inevitability of it is not surprising. People will naturally draw unrelated conclusions, and other topics will be sucked into the debate as a matter of course.

Whether Robert Mugabe is black, white, pink, yellow, brown, or green with purple polka dots, is irrelevant. What matters is that he is evil, corrupt, and prepared to use both the worst elements of the human psyche, and military force, to impose his will and to preserve his position.

So, the man lead his people to victory over the colonial oppressors....and then promptly knifed his primary ally and major competitor in the back. So, after twenty years in power, he had still done nothing about repatriating some productive land for his loyal supporters...until his position appeared to be threatened, whereupon he embarked on the current crusade of blaming the very farmers who had fed all his people these past two decades for the injustices his administration had done nothing to address.
Perhaps if Mugabe had, over the last twenty years, devoted some resources to training his nation's young people in the ways of the farmer, and to availing them of some land to be turned to that purpose, the nation of Zimbabwe would not now be in such a tenuous postion as is currently is.

However, by following the path that he has, the man has directed his nation's destiny along other lines. Some of the changes which affect populations, ie philosophical and economic changes, take many years to make themselves known. Others, such as starvation and death, are apparent very quickly.

And there will be starvation and death in Zimbabwe within the year, on a massive scale. Certainly, there will be intervention by Western governments to limit this suffering and to gain popular approval, but I fear that the response from the other, more traditional relief agencies will be somewhat muted. The reason for this is, I am afraid, going to be racially motivated. This time, those in the West who have traditionally supported charity efforts in the hopeless parts of the world, myself included, are not going to come to the party. This time, we are saying enough. This time it is our people who are being dumped on, and this time we are not going to support those who are doing the dumping.

I don't really give a fat rat's what the left wing press thinks; I believe they have held sway in the world's attention for far too long with far too little justification, and I have had a gutsful of the relentless promotion of the idea that it is somehow bad, evil, and wrong, for a person to be white and English speaking. If those who are brown of skin, or red of politics, or lacking in personal morals, educational apptitude, work ethic or common decency towards their fellow man are better able to craft a world wherein everyman may strive for betterment and happiness, I say, let them prove it.

This time I will be telling the relief agencies to go fish. This time my support will be going to the Dunkirk operation which will be run by the Australian government (and it will be) to bring those people who are my people out of Africa to the part of the world where they may be reagarded as being home. A great many black Zimbabweans will be left behind, and will suffer. This is a tragic inevitability.

Solotk, when you run for office, I want to be there in your campaign team. No-one else has been able to describe so astutely just how it is that the six million black Zimbabweans affected by Mugabe's atrocities are as much my people as are the twenty-odd thousand whites who employ them, nor how irrelevant is their colour, nor how it is one system against another and not one race against another.

[weedflier]

Oh how we live in the past! Of course with the benefit of hindsight the old British colonialism was wrong. But at the time it probably didn't so awful. Maybe it was done for motives of greed, to steal the wealth of other countries; maybe it was done for good motives like 'civilizing' them. Probably it was a mixture of the two. It was probably wrong for the forebears of a minority of white settlers to have the seized so much land, but it is also wrong for the children to be blamed for the sins of the fathers. After all, the land of the North and South American Indians and the aboriginal tribes of Australia and New Zealand was taken from them by force of arms also, but nobody seriously wishes to suggest that all the descendants of all the Europeans should have to hand back all the land without compensation and return it to the original people. Mr Mugabe has been shown to be a murdering despot and is typical of so many African dictators in caring firstly for himself and his family, then for his tribe and caring not a jot for his nation. If he did, he would institute a worthwhile scheme for the proper compensation for farmers for the loss of their land (otherwise he is lowering himself to the level of those whom he likes to scorn so much in just taking land by force of arms), he would involve the so-called white farmers in giving agricultural education to those getting the land and its distribution would be done on a fair basis. This of course will never happen because Mugabe has never changed from being a freedom fighter or terrorist (depending on your own definition of him then and now). For my money he may have been a 'freedom fighter' but now he's just a terrorist, ruling by fear administered by a band of thugs from his own tribe. The Commonwealth these days is just a joke and has shown itself unwilling or incapable of any meaningful form of censure of any African leader.
Yes Iraq is undoubtedly being led by a ghastly dictator, but because Dubbya wants to finish what his father wouldn't it doesn't seem to matter that Mugabe is killing off far more of his countrymen than Saddam is. It's typical of the American blinkered viewpoint that says that the Middle East (oil) is important, Africa isn't. I can't understand why the huge number of African Americans don't force Bush to adjust his priorities (except that most of them probably aren't rich supporters of the Republican party). As for Blair, he's just an irrelevant joke these days. He started with such good ideas but is now just a slave to the soundbite and Dubbya, incapable of an independant thought.
Undoubtedly the West should intervene effectively, but also (sadly) undoubtedly it will ignore Africa as it always has and all that we will see happen is a few minutes of television footage of the murder and starvation in Mr Mugabe's country, just after a long piece about Victoria Beckham's new baby or some-such world-shattering piece of globally important news.
:mad:

[A Civilian]

Who cares about Zimbabwean. Who cares about the Comanwealth. I think to many of you don't realise how much Britian has moved on. Anyone 30 or under (myself included) has never know Britian rule anythink worthwhile. Has not been taught in school of the rightiousness of the white people over those of other colours. And has not even been taught much in school about "anything" almost to do with the British empire. It is simply not taught anymore. Schools teach children about the Vikings, The Spanish Invasion and maybe the Romans and thats it.

Nobody cares that we once ruled this country. The idea that we would somehow oust a president (even one who is serious distrubed) as Mugabe is hasn't been reading the papers on how difficult the job is for Blair to gain support for the attack on Iraq. That we could suddenly want to go into Africa again is living in cloud coo koo land.

It's over. Were not a great power anymore. Countries can't just attack other countries that they don't like (well at least not without spending billions of US dollars in bribes:) ). Nor do we have much influence on other's any more.

There is no public will to go round invading people. Were more intrested in house price inflation. Morgatage rates and Footbal scores.

[solotk]

Bluppet, very properly, and quite correctly on 9/12 pledged support for the Spams, in the War against terrorism. Maybe he thought Bogside would get an Arclight, or that the US would move decisively against PIRA funders in the US. Well quelle surprise, neither happened. Bluppet got sold the classic dummy, and all of a sudden, BritFor is committed to supporting Bush's adventurism in Iraq. It stinks.

There are some that argue, that the White Farmers, are getting what they deserve in Zimbabwe. Maybe so, maybe not. I've done an awful lot of reading in the last few days, from HMS Tiger to Operation "Quartz", I've read through zim ex-pats forums, and Zanu PF supporters boards, and I can see where Black Bobs driving.

His mission, very simply, is to destroy any group, that might become a focus for resistance. Hence the 5.7 million people faced with starvation, or rather, the Non-Mugabe supporters.

The White Farmers, gave up their right to be British citizens after UDI, maybe not all of them, but a goodly proportion. It can be argued, that they made their beds, now they must lie in it.

Interesting. So why exactly did we go into Sierra Leone, or Bosnia? Or Kosovo? Why should we intervene at all?

Because a catastrophe of enourmous proportions, that will set the entire region on fire was looming.

I made the point yestersday, and I see Jockanicko says the same thing. It is not Rhodesia, it is Zimbabwe, a sovereign nation in it's own right. Insistence on calling it by it's pre-independence monicker, will continually inflame and justify the "Imperialist running dogs" camp. If you must refer to it as Rhodesia, then refer to it, as Beags says, by it's pre-UDI, pre-apartheid name of Southern Rhodesia

However, it is rapidly becoming the Balkans of Africa. A leadership intent on clinging to power, violent discrimination against ethnic minorities, murder of democratically elected opponents, corruption on a grand scale etc.

We can wring our hands and do nothing, or, we can intervene now, and save Lives. Sometimes, you have to intervene in another countries affairs, before they become a very real problem. Can Europe absorb up to a million refugees? Make no mistake, under the UN charter, they WILL be genuine refugees, and they will need housing, clothing and looking after.

It is, our humanitarian duty, and the resultant costs.....

Blue Wolf, makes the point, that there has been enough "Donating". I am absolutely in agreement. Food relief, is best delivered at gunpoint, and with the country under your control.You will never ever get nations to become self reliant, until you stop the "Donor" mentality. "Oh yes, you must donate, because you raped the country as a colony, and this is our compensation" Bollox :mad:

After Rwanda, there is no way, that Oxfam especially, will ever see one more red cent of my money. I watched USAF,Canadian, Australian. Belgian and Safair Albert crews and various other private cargo lines, enacting a mini-Berlin airlift into Goma and Kigali, round the clock. The aircrew really believed, they were doing good, and were justifiably proud of what they were achieving.

Good thing they never got into Kigali market, to see where the bulk of their cargo was ending up, being sold by Tutsi gangs,with the "New Governments" connivance and the UN field staff nad their new Government friends, living it up in the Mille Collines Hotel, and the "Kigali Nights" night club. People starving to death 5 miles away, and new Mercedes in the car park.

Sanctions, will only hurt those, we are trying to help. Iraq has proven that. We need,with other Commonwealth nations , to intervene now, to force a regime change in Zimbabwe.

Once that has been achived, we can then, with a level playing field, address the issue of land reform, and there DOES need to be comprehensive land reform, or the resentment , will fester forever.

I am not in favour of committing British Forces to a regime change, so the resident White population can get it all. I am, in favour however, of regime change, fair distribution of land, dictated on Economic and logistical neccessity , and the training of the indigenous population, to become more self-reliant,better farmers and businessmen and major contributors to their nations well-being.In other words, to restore their pride in their nation.

If the "European" population, want that, and believe it is one, not 2 Zimbabwes, then show us that, and stop wringing your fcuking hands, and reaching for the British passport, when it all goes tits.

Do the British care? Well I don't see the Nat.Union of Farmers , marching to London, or the Countryside alliance marching to Downing Street, then again, if Mugabe was to ban fox hunting...

I don't see ex-Zims organising petitions, or trying to bring their plight, forcibly to the medias attention.

So, all you Zim ex-pats, BLACK and WHITE, if there is a problem, really a problem, and you're not just concerned, about your financial well being or property, then start showing the British population, and garnering popular support. We will get involved, if you show us we have to. The Media isn't allowed into Zimbabwe, but photos and media from Zim, sent via Wireless Internet connection, will keep us all informed, as to the true extent, of this impending catastrophe.

Pprune contributors, if you still have close links to Zim, and can get a wireless internet kit out to Zim, or even point them at a website http://www.qsl.net/n9zia/wireless/ ,where they can make this stuff at very little cost, and start getting the NEWS out, then we can force this Governments hand...

Otherwise, I am sorely afraid, that we will be launching Op. Dynamo II

That's it.... Rant Switch to Safe...

P3

[Arkroyal]

solotk and Bluewolf.....Bravo. Excellent and well-reasoned posts.

Civilian, I know you like to leave in your sfelin mistakes and, presumably, your poor grammar, to annoy people. But don't you think your views would carry more force if you didn't?:confused:

[West Coast]

Bloody amazing to see your lot extol the virtues of a regime change in Zimbabwe, yet harangue the US for wanting to depose Saddam. By any measure, Saddam is a greater threat. I suppose that it involves a former colony full of white folk makes it okay.

Edited to maintain a civil tone..

[solotk]

So tell me why is GW Bush Jnr. justified in attacking Iraq, West Coast?

Zimbabwe is not about white farmers, it's about 6,000,000 people about to starve, a little more pressing then Dubya's jobs for the boys...

Oh sorry I forgot, Iraq needs attacking, because Israel wants it so.

Once again, no Iraqis on 9/11 but a lot of Saudis. Tell me, why aren't we attacking them? Which is more dangerous, a nation that knows it will be back in the stone age, if it uses one device contrary to the rules of war, or, a nation that believes all westerners are infidels, and have the money to keep creating innocent orphans and widows, and willingly do so?

http://www.msnbc.com/news/796971.asp?0si=-

[Archimedes]

With the greatest respect, West Coast, your opening shot is unworthy and open to many comebacks re: treatment of native Americans and African-Americans...

You might also note that many of the people affected in Zimbabwe are British passport holders. I'm sure that if Uncle Bob was conducting a campaign of similar intensity against US passport holders, President Bush would be talking of regime change too.

Saddam Hussein is not, currently, conducting a brutal campaign against British citizens.

Also, the question is whether or not we should do something about Mugabe, rather than just ignore it - which, at the moment, we (or more accurately President Tony and his cronies) are.
Furthermore, it's not just 'a bunch of white folk' that's the issue (although Uncle Bob would be delighted to hear you say this). Mugabe, aided by North Korea (part of the axis of evil, I seem to think...) conducted massacres against the Matabaele and tortureas and murders the opposition - which is overwhelmingly made up of the black population. Mugabe is now denying food to areas that do not support him - in short, he's possibly on the verge of commiting genocide.

No-one denies that Saddam is a dangerous, murderous dictator; nor that disposing of him would be no more or less than he deserves. The point here is that although we have strong suspisions about the threat, we have no hard evidence: yes, I know about int and protecting sources, but you can't have legitimacy based on the 'we know, but aren't going to tell you what we know' principle.

With Uncle Bob, we have more than enough evidence that something should be done beyond a bunch of FCO officials sitting around looking a bit grim and the State Department uttering the odd word of condemnation here and there. That's the point: if we do something about Saddam, we should do something about Mugabe; arguably, we should do that first (after all, the UK was responsible for him gaining power!)

[West Coast]

Wanting to go there for six million starving, my A** There are a dozen nations or more in Africa that are famine stricken. I dont see any tears lost over them. I dont see any threads dedicated to that. The whole flavor of this and the associated thread has been over the plight of the white farmer. If true famine relief is what you seek, it can be done without a regime change at the top. If this had been a former French colony without Brit interests nothing would be made of it.

I respect the rule of law, but that Mugabe essentially nationalizes the farm lands to give to the blacks in some romantic notion hardly can be equally compared to what Saddam has done in the past and is capable of doing in the future.

If Saddam uses WMD on a western power, yup, he will suffer in kind. but what about his own people(already done it) or adjecent countries(once again, already done it) What if he uses his still formidable conventional powers on an Arab or Persian neighbor(seems like he has done that also) What if he refuses to comply with UN weapons mandates(guess what goes in here) I am not complacent enough to sit here and let Saddam make the next move. Recent reports are surfacing that Saddam has let Osoma's boys brew up chemicals in his country. When do you put your foot down? After the gas is released on the London underground? After Harrods lies in rubble?

Archimedes
I will never argue that the US govt. treatment of blacks is anything but wrong. As a first generation American of Irish parents, the recent history of Ireland is of intense interest to me and I cant help but find parallels. If however it is offensive, I will edit and remove.

Your seemingly salient point of threats to UK passport holders as being a trigger for action is taken. The right to defend citizens is not one I discount. Yes the US would also take action. One of the missions trained for by the US Marines is evacution of non combatants from foreign countries. There is a difference between safe guarding and evacuating Brits and overthrowing the government. Its one thing to chopper out your folks, quite another to storm the palace.

[ORAC]

About time this thread was moved to Jet Blast.

[solotk]

Yes 6,000,00 and yes wanting to go there. At the risk of sounding like a broken record, I was in Rwanda in '94, and saw at first hand, what happens when you don't intervene.

If we don't intervene, this will spiral out of control, as the refugees head into South Africa, Malawi, Zambia, Europe, and the Good Old US of A. Then it will truly become everyone's problem, and Mugabe will have won.

It's time this thread moved to JetBlast Mc D..... :D

[Paterbrat]

West Coast at the risk of being unacceptably non PC I would say that mention of the white farmers is being made because for so very long now all we have had is a litany of how the black has been oppressed by the whites. It is simply that we can now see that blacks are just as capable of racism, and that it is not an exclusively white disease!!!

[Jackonicko]

I seldom agree with West Coast, and it is facile and offensive to make any comparison between supposed subjugation or persecution of Irish Catholics (in RECENT years, let's not go back to Cromwell or Wolf Tone) and what's happening in Zim (OR Iraq) or even what happened to US Blacks in the 50s and 60s, or to Native Americans 100 years before that.

However. The way in which this argument has centred on the treatment of the farmers does make it look like a grubby and rather self interested debate, as Westie suggests and makes it all to easy for Mugabe to paint us as colonialists who haven't grasped the changed realities of the situation in Zimbabwe.

Where he is wrong, though, is that regime change isn't required to change the underlying situation. I'm not even sure that real democracy will necessarily help, since (yet again) we drew the borders in the wrong place, giving an unbalanced tribal mix. I can't remember whether Nkomo's lot were Ndebele, or Shona, or whatever, but I do remember that since the Lancaster House agreement there has been no underlying stability even in black Zimbabwe.

Moreover the white farmers are a powerful irritant and a natural scapegoat, and most of them chose to stay where they were. I wouldn't condone violence towards them, of course, but nor do I think we should feel any great debt to them, beyond the debt of honour we owe all those who have fought with us and for us over the years.

Few sensible people would object in principal to the notion of Africa for the Africans, and the theory of land reform is fine, as long as existing farmers are compensated. There's also the practical matter of how land ownership impacts on the ability of the country to feed itself, which gives a powerful reason for leaving the White farmers well alone, even if they have to lease the land they farm from the nation, or if the nation claims ownership of that land.

But this is a distraction (and a welcome one for Mugabe). If there is a reason to intervene it is to restore democracy and ensure fair treatment for all the minority peoples in Zim, black AND white.

Morally, Mugabe deserves to be removed. Practically, removing him will ease suffering and may prevent starvation. He is an undemocratic tyrant, and has engaged in military action outside his own borders. To say that he represents any less of a threat to his neighbours than Saddam is arguable. He lacks WMD however, so represents no real threat to the USA or Israel.

So where's the grubby self interest again?

[Letsby Avenue]

Dare I say that the typical UK citizen should fear little from a terrorist attack, he probably has better odds of winning the national lottery than of dying at the hands of an Iraqi terrorist.

Despite these odds we still manage to kill over three hundred UK citizens a month on our roads! Surely, instead of spending billions on bombing Iraq we should widen the A12 south of Chelmsford????

To get back to the point - Mugabe is black and can therefore do no wrong in this Left wing age of white 'mea culpa' Tony Bliar would rather sell out the (white) Gibraltarians in the name of some European utopia than bother himself with the unseemly ethnic cleansing in Zimbabwe.

PS: Is nobody interested in the fact that our independent Nuclear Deterrent is in the hands of a retired ships steward? Frankly I am more worried about 'Our John' than Saddam Hussein.

[solotk]

Just for West Coast......

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/africa/2207060.stm

Wow, I didn't know that :D

[West Coast]

Got to hit the rack, leave on a four day, but not without comment.

Jacko
My tag line reffered to Ireland in the 1800s. Since removed to remain civil.
I will leave it to you Brits to deciede amongst yourselves if you wish to impose your will on a former colony. The description you provide of Mugabe could describe Saddam on a good day at the zoo on his best manners. Thats all fine, do as you see fit. I hope you have the wherewithal to do do it right and an exit strategy in place, your gonna be there for awhile. I learned my lesson on nation building(and mission creep) in Africa 10 years ago. Much of this thread as applied to the violence and killing could describe Afghanistan in the years leading up to Sept 11. It could also describe Iraq, yet I hear significant disdain for the US and the current and upcoming campaigns in those countries. As it hits closer to home for your lot with your expats in danger, perhaps you will share in our urgency.

Solotk
I don't doubt that there are millions of starving Africans in Zimbabwe. I pulled up the UN WFP site for verification, and as best I can tell the whole continent is starving. Your link lists an additional 6 countries that are stricken, yet I hear no mention of it from you. That Zimbabwe is a former colony has to figured into the equation.

[Kiting for Boys]

Not strictly relevant, from last Saturday's Times
Parris was born in Africa

This is why Africa gets the leaders it deserves
Matthew Parris



There was a woman who had whipped her hair into a sea of caramel spikes, which is hard to do with tight black African curls. There was a woman who had achieved a chemical blonde. There was a man in zips and a black leather coat — black on black — a batik skirt and new trainers, top of the range. There were men who had decorated their heads by mowing lines around the cranium, one in a crinkly, multicoloured crêpe-cotton shirt and rainbow plastic winkle-picker shoes, impossibly tight, cap worn backwards. He was trying to get upgraded into business class, inventing ludicrous stories.
The Englishwoman doing the check-in for Air Gabon at Gatwick was having none of it, and stood her ground. She had 36 passengers to check in for the flight from London to Libreville, via Brussels. It took her a little more than three hours.

This was not her fault. Her passengers were waBenzi, the term used across West Africa to describe the successful: the people with money, power or influence; the people who drive Mercedes-Benzes. There being few roads surfaced or properly maintained outside the squalid towns and cities, they do not drive far, but they drive big.

My fellow passengers at Gatwick struck me as worth describing less as an exercise in travel writing (we all have our airport stories) than as an object lesson in the politics of development. For this was the elite, the commercial and administrative class through whom (short of the reimposition of colonial rule) both aid and advice from countries such as ours must be channelled. These were the rich. They must have been. They were able to fly to and from Europe. Some were from Gabon, many from Congo, and all had been shopping.

The word “shopping” hardly does justice to the industrial scale of this little crowd´s acquisitions. I have seldom in one place seen a collection of luggage at the same time so ostentatious, so expensive and so gross. They were leather or fabric-covered suitcases as high as a child, and more cube-shaped than case- shaped.

And everyone kept pushing in. We started in a queue — three whites scattered among the Africans — but by the time the whites got anywhere near the check-in desk we were the last three in the line. The man in skirt and trainers and his enormous wife simply barged. Others sidled. Some struck up loud conversations with those at the front of the queue, then pretended to be positioned there.

A man in dark glasses (indoors, at night) and two noisy female companions held up the whole check-in for about half an hour with an argument about how much excess baggage his party had (a mountain) then, failing to fool the check-in agent, affected to saunter off with his women and talk to someone else — to show he didn´t care — leaving his documents half-processed on the counter. This delayed the agent´s work until she coolly shoved his documents aside and received the next passenger — whereupon Dark Glasses, alarmed, pushed in front of a middle-aged man of scholarly demeanour and his unpushy wife — infuriating the couple to the point of pushing back in again. Meanwhile, Crinkly Shirt, having succeeded in pushing in so brutally that Decorated Head protested, came over all loud-laughs-and-handshakes and “what-a-card-I-am, eh!” — which, such was its swagger and sudden bonhomie, worked. Suddenly, everyone was wreathed in smiles. Another cheater got away with it.

At last they were all ready for passport control. And of course after that they all got lost again in the duty-free shops. The flight was delayed while missing passengers were paged, latecomers sauntering up to the departure gate with yet more purchases in big bags, leading to more arguments about hand luggage and more attempts to cheat. Found out, the capacity of these people to affect innocent shock and apparent ignorance of every rule was astonishing. The airline attempted a staggered boarding procedure but nobody took any notice, stampeding at the gate and on to the plane, whereupon a handful more passengers tried to pretend that they were business class and had to be moved from these seats, each professing the same total surprise at their eviction as they had shown at the news that flying involves weight restrictions.

The Dutch crew handled this with bemusement. Though our airline was called Air Gabon, the plane and its captain and crew seemed to have been hired from a Netherlands charter company. All the stewards looked like Tintin and showed as amused a command of Third World chaos as Herve’s young Belgian journalist.

One sensed among this European crew an unvoiced — professionally unvoiceable — scorn for these passengers. The crew was resigned to such behaviour and they were paid them to handle it. One sense, too, the calm confidence we have when observing the vanity of fools, that they will not have the last laugh.

We took off, landing in Brussels 38 minutes later. Decorated Head complained loudly, to the admiration of his women, that there had been no refreshments: “Ce ne’est pas gentil,” he said to a stewardess. Dark Glasses was prevented from disembarking with the departing passengers to get some beer. On his behalf, Crinkly Shirt began a huge row, storming up and down the aisle, shouting and swearing that Belgium was a racist country and lunging at the stewardess as if to hit her.

At one point he yelled that he would get a gun “and blow this plane up”, and soon had a faction among the passengers muttering and interjecting in his support; but the Tintins were unmoved, everybody calmed down, and we were soon airborne.

Truculence turned back to docility as suddenly as it had flared up, supper was served, Crinkly Shirt banged his tray and demanded more beer, and soon everybody was asleep. When we landed six hours later, all the passengers clapped. We escaped into Libreville, a gentle mess of a place. Anger, jollity, meekness, swagger, obedience, had passed across these waBenzi like sun and rain racing across an island, with such speed: momentarily warm, momentarily cruel, suddenly kind, suddenly innocent, suddenly corrupt ... I tried hard not to quote to myself that famous line of Kipling’s, and I won’t here. These were only the regular waBenzi, perhaps trying too hard. The super-waBenzi would have been flying on Air France, business class, from their boltholes in Paris and Nice. They are less conspicuous. Those are the waBenzi with whom governments deal. These — economy class on Air Gabon with me — were the ones whom businessmen, aid workers, doctors and travel agents must face.

From the picture, the object lesson, I have tried here to paint, I would like to draw your attention to a detail I think important. With the broad view — of the volatile, sometimes brutal and sometimes rapacious people who have an unfortunate habit of getting to the top in Africa — I think we are pretty familiar. With the warmth and talent — the fortitude, the ingenuity and the huge likeability of the little people, the common people, of Africa — nobody who travels there can fail to be familiar. So we tell ourselves that by some tremendous mischance this most worthwhile of human races is persistently badly led.

But is it mischance? I had watched Crinkly Shirt barging the queue with growing fury. When he succeeded I hardened my heart against him. Any European would. It would be hard thereafter ever to like or trust this man again. This was a white man´s reaction. His cheating and bullying had also annoyed and disadvantaged his fellow Africans.

But when, having won, he turned to his black victims, all smiles, joshed with them and held out an arm to shake hands, their frostiness melted. This fellow was a winner. He was behaving in a kingly manner. They were on his side again — what a bloke! Resentment fled, to be replaced by a wish to be part of the top dog’s gang. That is how the common people of Africa let themselves down; by letting their own leaders let them down. I’m afraid an instinct for justice requires a certain meanness of spirit, an ungenerosity, an unwillingness to forgive. It may also involve a resentment or begrudging of power. Such qualities are not entirely likeable.

The passengers on Air Gabon forgave their friend. He will therefore do it again. I am not confident about the New Partnership for Africa’s Development in which the Prime Minister is putting so much trust. I wish he and Clare Short had been with me in that queue

[Jackonicko]

Thanks for posting that. Parris can certainly write. What a communicator.

Westie. As long as it's 'Britain going in...' it's wrong. Whatever happens in Zim must be a wider effort by the UN, EU or some other coalition. Just as it has to be (politically) in Iraq.

[steamchicken]

Does anyone else here remember various Tories accusing Peter Hain, two years ago when the Zim crisis started, of "making Britain a laughing stock" for being rude to Mugabe? It was just after he seized the diplomatic bag; whilst he was rigging the parliamentary elections etc - Hain called him uncivilised, Michael Ancram exploded....don't they ever read their own speeches?

But seriously...I recommend the Zimbabwe Daily News, www.dailynews.co.zw (http://www.dailynews.co.zw). This is the last honest newspaper operating in Zimbabwe, despite attempts to jail the editor, batter the reporters, and blow up the printworks (not once but twice) and the editorial offices. You can donate them money at the site under "Daily News Fund", and they need it.

BTW what reports that al-Qaida are brewing up chemicals in Iraq? Any evidence? It would be surprising, if only because the Baathists are a secular fascist party and have fallen out quite frequently with the Islamists. As someone once said about John Major, "being permanently in a minority of one is usually a sign of being wrong!"

[Archimedes]

West Coast,

Given your response (and subsequent editing of your first post), I should point out that my first line was not intended as a direct dig: I was trying to point out that it could start a "Well you did this, which makes you much worse than us" argument - which would distract from the points being made. I hope that you didn't think that I was taking a pop, and if I caused any offence or irritation, I apologise.

[solotk]

Excellent link Steamchicken, and bookmarked.

The official government news website is here....

http://www.chronicle.co.zw/index.php?id=6563&pubdate=2002-08-23

That particular story is highlighted, because of the bottom line
:(

[Scud-U-Like]

Peter Hain's action was relatively tame, compared with Peter Tatchell's attempts to arrest Mugabe:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/zimbabwe/article/0,2763,447144,00.html

I don't normally approve of Tatchell's 'in-yer-face' form of gay rights activism, but you've got to admire his enthusiasm!

'West Coast' makes some very astute observations. I couldn't have put it better myself.

[solotk]

Goodonya Thatchell.......

At least someone is prepared to have a go. Hopefully he didn't end up too battered..

[MrBernoulli]

Jackonicko, if you are still viewing this thread,

I am having trouble following all your arguments so I would appreciate it if you could clarify a point for me:

A quote of yours from page 3 of this thread - "Few sensible people would object in principal to the notion of Africa for the Africans....." Who, precisely are you referring to? What makes an African an African? How many generations of a peoples' ancestors need to be born and live in Africa to make their offspring "Africans"?

[The Claw]

Very good point, does your theory work in Europe aswell Jackonicko?:confused:

[Jackonicko]

While my point is I'll admit hopelessly idealistic, impractical and flawed, the general position I describe is one of discomfort that the 'Colonial Oppressors' should not, in general continue to thrive at the expense of the indigenous people.

I know that present black populations may not be indigenous (I read somewhere that Zulus were nearly as New to South Africa as the Boers, for example).

I know that some white Rhodesians have been there (or their families have) for two hundred years.

I'm not saying that they should simply be thrown out with no compensation. I acknowledge that they make a significant contribution to the well-being of their black co-citizens, and am surprised at Mugabe's short-sightedness. But the inequality which persists needs to be addressed, and the terrible injustices meted out to the native population do need to be redressed.

I don't approve of evicting White farmers and giving their land and property to Mugabe's cronies and relatives.

I don't quite get your banter with regard to Europe, old chap, but would say that I feel similar discomfort at the fate of Maoris, Aborigines and Native Americans. No-one would expect the whites to give up all their land and property and return to Europe from all of these places, but equally, some more equal co-existence should surely be aspired to, and some recognition of and restitution for historical wrongs should perhaps be considered. Shoving the Navajo (for example) into constrained reservations on the least useful and least cultivable desert land of Arizona and New Mexico doesn't really count, in my view.

[BEagle]

Jacko - you're getting a bit out of your depth here, mate. Mr B knows all about South Rhodesia and its current troubles, having been born in Salisbury and having lived there for many years.

I remember Peter Hain from the 'Stop the 70 Tour' concerning the Seth Efrikan cricket team in 1970. He was a staunch anti-apartheidist. So if he treated Mugabe with the contempt which any uncivilised tyrant should expect, then that certainly wasn't down to any racial bigotry!!

[The Claw]

I'm surprised that you don't get my "banter" about Europe. Using your logic, black people no matter if they were born in Europe and have lived here all their lives , should be moved back to Africa. Why stop there? Since the Germans bombed the Brits, maybe all Germans and German companies should be forced to give up everything they own in the UK?

You can not punish people for events that happend before they were born, nor can this be used as an excuse for crimes committed today. Organizations put into place to prevent these events happening again are failing the people of Zimbabwe today. If Mugabe was a white man, the UN would have taken drastic action a long time ago. :mad:

[Jackonicko]

Out of my depth perhaps, but simply view it as a moral issue.

If you can't do anything about historical injustices (cos it happened before they were born) then why make any fuss about Palestine, and why did we ever bother getting out of India? Why did we bother sorting slavery? Why give black Americans the vote?

I don't suggest that anyone should be repatriated, but do recognise that their are two injustices here. One being what is happening now to the privileged white minority, and the other being the rights of the indigenous population, who have been oppressed and subjugated for centuries.

The solution needs to be a compromise, and the problem is complex, but allowing a handful of white tobacco farmers to control most of Zimbabwe's good arable land is hardly a morally justifiable solution. The shame is that Mugabe's extremely populist solution of land reform (which is electorally popular and perhaps even democratically justifiable, at least in theory) promises to offer the worst of all worlds to everyone except Mugabe and his cronies.

No-one would support this programme of overnight eviction without compensation (but compensation was supposed to be funded by the UK Govt), but nor is it sensible to imagine that the status quo could be maintained for ever.

I do not feel that any comparison between black Britons and white Zimbabweans is valid. Our minority black population haven't been 'keeping us down' for decades, nor do they exert a disproportionate influence or have total control of UK agriculture or any other field of commerce.

The only European comparison I can find is the current drive by German families to recover property in what was Silesia and Pomerania, but which is now part of Poland. One might say that German conduct in WW II has set aside any claim on such property and territory.

There are plenty of reasons for doing something about Mugabe, whose disregard for democracy and oppression and suppression of his black opposition has been shocking. His treatment of the white farmers is also scandalous, but is the least of his crimes, and to over-emphasise this aspect of his regime is to play into his hands.

[Flatus Veteranus]

Jacko, you may be on to a good thing here. Most of the surviving great estates in this country date from the Norman land-grab back in the 11th Century. Perhaps you feel that a spot of redistribution in favour of we humble Anglo-Saxons would be in order?

We quit India in 1947 because we could not afford ( or would not afford) to stay there. Also the Atlee government's socialist conscience was a bit tender. ;)

[The Claw]

You really do need to do some homework. Firstly Mugabe has not singled out "Tobacco" farmers. Secondly those "Tobacco" farmers keep a lot of "indigenous" people employed, more so than the new "foreign" owners of Zimbabwean property.

Secondly we all protested just as loudly when Mugabe slaughted the Matabele. The UK chose not to get involved in matters of a Zimbabwean nature. This time it involves British subjects and is very much a British matter.

Yes, why give black Americans the vote? According to you they belong in Africa?

The UK has poured millions of pounds into Africa and what good has it done? This time Africa needs to show some initiative before being proped up by the UK any further.

Also, it is not only the black people who have suffered in Africa. Just because they are in the minority does not mean that they do not deserve human rights.

[Jackonicko]

Claw,

Are you being deliberately obtuse?

Singling out the white farmers and intervening on their behalf makes this appear to be no more than self interest and colonial style meddling.

Nowhere do I deny that what is happening to the farmers is not appalling (nor did I state that they all farmed only tobacco), why do you choose to ignore the injustices meted out to the majority population?

I do not pretend that black Americans belong in Africa, nor that white Americans belong here, nor that white Zimbabweans belong here. Don't be so silly.

Some adjustment in land ownership, however, is right, proper and inevitable following decolonisation, though I don't agree with Mugabe's way of implementing it. Should we have let Ronnie Biggs keep his loot?

[The Claw]

What I'm trying to make you understand is that there are many complex injustices that need to be addressed and even minorities have a right to justice. This however is a seperate issue.

The issue at hand is that two wrongs do not make matters right. What Mugabe is doing is WRONG. End of story.:mad:

[PercyDragon]

The Claw.

You are spot on mate. Your views are mine exactly. As an old Africa hand (twelve years, Kenya and Nigeria), I put a post in this thread a few days ago, but was immediately removed by some Moderator, for presumably 'being too racist'. The general thrust of my argument was that we, in the West, have two options, which are:

1. Ignore Africa and let them get on with it.

2. Re-colonise the whole continent.

This post will, in all probability, be removed too. Think we have freedom of speech? Huh. Dream on.

[fobotcso]

Again I find myself agreeing with ORAC in his 21st Aug post.

This is an excellent thread and the powerful arguments being presented make my brain hurt (some might say that's not hard to do).

But it is entirely politico/historical and there is nothing about it that is to do with Professional Military Aviation.

Percy's post above points out something we all know; that this Forum ismoderated in spite of the empty box on the Forum Contents Page.

Why can't this thread go to Jet Blast? It might get a wider audience and, in spite of what some might say, they're not all buffoons down there.

[Kiting for Boys]

Yes I know the country isn't called Rhodesia

But here's today's piece from Parris - the cartoon with 'two jags' was fun as well

A little less swagger would do Africa a power of good
matthew parris



It was fitting in Johannesburg this week that John Prescott should, on his arrival on African soil, have been accorded five Mercedes-Benz motorcars, for Mr Prescott is truly the most African politician on the government front bench. He is a bruiser, he has charm, and he does not do much. Behind the ever-grander names for the ever-grander departments over which he presided during new Labour’s first term sat a big ego, plenty of punch and no grip.
Magnified a thousandfold and projected on to the African map, the modest administrative failure of Mr Prescott’s old regime at Transport etc here in Britain points us to the causes of the colossal political failure of Africa. The reasons are swagger, indolence, self-indulgence and hot air. Beside that problem nothing encountered by world leaders at their conference matters. You might as well throw away the text of their accord now.

Our Deputy Prime Minister would mingle easily in any group of dictators from that continent. The people of Africa admire sheer physical size in a leader, and Prescott has it. They like to think their leaders capable of flooring a man with a single blow, and Prescott can. In keeping with many of the statesmen in Johannesburg, Prescott loves luxury, cares about appearances and prizes expensive motor cars. He dances in public, before the television cameras. He spends generously on clothes.

In accordance, too, with the African habit, Mr Prescott is edgy about criticism, flies quickly off the handle when twitted, and is liable to turn violent. In most of Africa and parts of the North of England, criticism is taken by politicians as a treacherous affront. The man we call the Mouth of the Humber spent his formative political years in a one-party state called Hull.

And yet with John Prescott, no less than with African presidents of a dodgier sort, there is something likeable — irresistible, or almost so.

It was what made Idi Amin simultaneously murderous and fun. “Ooh John,” we say.“You are awful. But we like you.”

More tribal electors than we pretend in rural Mashonaland, Zimbabwe, would say the same of Robert Mugabe. He is awful but they like him. He is a thug, but he is their thug.

The quality, however, which above all marks the Member for Hull East is the quality which in Africa is almost synomymous with power: swagger.

Africans do swagger well and they do it big. They also do submissiveness well. And they can switch with bewildering speed. Nelson Mandela is the only counter- example, famous, I am afraid, because that is what he is: untypical, the unwitting Robben Island creation of Afrikaner idiotdom, not the natural democratic product of his own people.

An occupational hazard for newspaper columnists are the letters we get from supporters we do not want. Whenever you suggest in print that between peoples there might be cultural differences so marked as to make it useful to generalise, letters come in from racists congratulating you. Such correspondents seek reasons to hate and hurt people on the basis of their race, and commonly believe that race determines behaviour, a theory which permits them to set their face against an entire race on the ground that its members are unalterably inferior.

So when on this page two weeks ago I wrote about an airline queue at Gatwick for a flight to Gabon, and offered my picture of cheating, rule-breaking and showing-off as an illustration of the way the “waBenzi” at the top of the heap in black Africa abuse their power, I expected a few letters from white racists. They duly arrived. I ignored them. Much more encouraging have been letters from people who love and know Africa, and who do not dislike its peoples. Every such correspondent has agreed with me. The problem is not the genes but the culture.

Culture can change, from within and from without. Western liberals are not afraid to pillory racism, sexism, anti-Semitism. Pillorying works: look at the change in public attitudes towards drink-driving. We are beginning to find our voice against what offends us in some Asian cultures, too: the caste system, the relegation of women. We must also find our voice for Africa.

Swagger, and the meekness in the face of swagger which exalts it, are the problem. They are ingrained in the way African culture treats the ideal of maleness and manhood and, even after centuries of estrangement from its roots, some echo of this survives in Afro-Caribbean culture, insults women, exalts lawlessness, glorifies cheating, disparages conscientiousness and holds back West Indian boys in British schools.

Listen to rap music, hear the words, feel the empty bravado and jack-the-lad bombast, and you will have the whole damn strutting coxcombery in a nutshell. In Africa, statesmen fail to disentangle their rap from their politics.

To remark on this is not at all to say that an unassuming bookishness or a self-denying devotion to others is seldom observed among African men. One often observes it. I have seen altruism and met wonderful examples of quiet goodness on the continent. Beyond the continent, working within organisations whose culture demands that rules of discipline, reliability and industry are respected by the bosses as much as their underlings, African men do as well as any.

But within African culture itself these qualities are less likely to get a man noticed and admired, or secure for him the deference they might within British culture. The corollary is also true: boastful and arrogant behaviour, putting yourself above the law, indolence, extravagance and treading on those smaller than you — behaviour which would be resented and held against anyone in our culture — help a man to cut a figure in African politics and business, and beyond them.

There is undoubtedly respect for learning, but education tends to be prized not as a deepening of knowledge but as a possession — like the philospher’s stone — which, once acquired, will give its possessor special powers, not least over those who lack it.

Far from bolstering the racist argument, to understand this gives the lie to racism. African countries’ chronic failure to achieve has nothing to do with any failure of potential on the part of their people: their people are victims of their own culture. Released from a culture which exalts what is vain- glorious and undervalues what is worthwhile, what could they not achieve?

But first they, and we, have to admit the problem. It is of limited use spouting in Johannesburg about the importance of water, or of finding and funding low-tech ways of providing it, if once the pipe is installed the community it serves does not organise itself to maintain it, stop cattle trampling on it, and dissuade people from peeing into the river upstream. Talk to anyone who has actually lived and worked with ordinary people and in everyday situations in Africa, and they will bear me out: time and again failures of leadership, the failure of the whole concept of the ascription of responsibility to individuals, mean that what is created or started is not maintained.

It need not be so. Of course the West must change, must open its markets to Africa, but Africans must change, too. They need new role models and they need to understand how we despise — how the world despises — the role models they have. Press, politicians and the public in Europe and America must put Africa’s villainous leaderships in the media stocks. We must not be afraid to laugh, sneer and rage at them. World indignation does work; however slowly, it can gather immense power. It is time to start.

Let nobody question African muscle. Ask yourself why black slaves were imported in the first place into countries with native peasant masses of their own. Let nobody denigrate the African mind: where would the world’s literature, art and music be without it? Let nobody deny African willpower or African courage: in battle and in sport they are legendary. Let nobody doubt the potential for big-heartedness of the ordinary people of Africa: there is something generous, uncircumspect, in their spirit which none who have travelled there can have missed and which is fitfully almost sublime.

Working mindlessly in gangs under orders, or working ingeniously and creatively alone, African people have proved themselves capable of tremendous feats of strength and endurance on the one hand, and skill and imagination on the other. But between the two, mind and muscle, something in the African nation state keeps short-circuiting, and it is a sad waste and a crying shame. On Planet Earth, Africa is a stain and a glory.

Removing the stain is not a problem in Africa: it is the problem. No other problems would defeat us if it was solved; all will defeat us until it is. And I will bet you all five of John Prescott’s Mercedes-Benzes that nobody so much as mentions it at the Johannesburg summit.

[The Claw]

Excellent piece, I couldn't agree more.

Oh, for fobotcso, ultimately solving this problem would have tremendous value for future aviation in Africa.

We need to get rid of this crazy notion that a requirement of a racist is that you must have a white skin. Whatever the ills of the white population in the past, we have learnt and continue to strive to accept other cultures within our communities. We also protect the minorities within our community. Africa can't even accept their various tribes into their communities. Our efforts to address the wrongs of the past are seen as a sign of weakness within the African community. Africa continues to demand our aid and yet fails to protect our people?

It is time for Africa to look inwards and for us to stand up for ourselves. The current situation can not be allowed to continue, all of our futures depend on it. :(

[Mac the Knife]

Interesting stuff here - read Parris' last one (thanks Kiting) and it was spot on, just as this one is.

One of my senior trainees is black, well connected, and well aware of all the thievery going on. "Why don't you speak up Joe?", says I. "Eeeeh, they will just start saying, "Oh, you getting clever now Joe? You spending too much time with the whiteys now Joe" so what can I do? Eeeeh, it's tough...."

As Parris says it's hard getting things done when you're dealing with folks whose whole culture and value system is so different. That isn't to say that it isn't valid, just that it is inappropriate for long term survival and success in the 21st Century. However much one regrets history and current global realities one can't just unwish them and trust that they will magically go away. HIV is a reality and the fact is that peoples who are unwilling or unable to alter their sexual behaviour will end up dead - gays have done, so why not black people? It just isn't any good trusting that the mzungu (pejorative term for whites) will eventually come up with a vaccine or better drugs. Sadly, magical thinking on many levels is such a core part (and a not unattractive one) of African culture that suspending it will change the culture profoundly and irrevocably.

When the old SA dispensation was dying, whites were told "Adapt or die!" - well, most of then have adapted and are coping reasonably well. Adaptability, the ability to change attitudes and often long ingrained habits in response to evolutionary pressures has always been a large ingredient in the continuance of species and peoples. Unfortunately a majority of black Africans seem to find this particularly difficult, though as Parris says, there is no reason to doubt their potential for success once the mindset changes.